By in Technology

Have You Noticed Ever Decreasing Website Ranks?

Most curious, indeed! Website rankings. They seem illogical, to say the least.

I've been taking note of various web site rankings. And they just don't make ordinary sense.

If you receive more visitations to your site -- if more people are reading your material -- it doesn't matter. Quite likely your site is still diminishing, perhaps rapidly, in web site ranking.

And it's by no means just me. Allow me to suggest you check out your site... Visit https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo

When you enter the site URL, it will draw a graph of your web site's ratings over time. Be prepared for what you are likely to see. It won't be pretty.

But what is causing it? Is it the search engine algorithms? Well, that would make sense. Is someone "pulling the stopper" on your bath tub water, so to speak? This trend started fairly suddenly, if you look back. I'm thinking about October 2018. Certainly something is causing it. You tell ME what has been done.


Image Credit » Snap Shot of Author's Site Ranking - Image by Author

You will need an account to comment - feel free to register or login.

Comments

MegL wrote on January 4, 2019, 8:53 AM

A number of people noted this on some sites I belong to. They were disappointed because it meant their income reduced. They didn't know the reason. They had some ideas, Pinterest is cutting out a lot of accounts for some reason - that will reduce traffic: Google is cutting down on health related sites to cut out "quackery". Some people received less traffic, others had the same or more traffic but the income per click was less. How that affects a website ranking I don't know.

lookatdesktop wrote on January 4, 2019, 10:15 AM

Quora has an article, although there are some grammar issues with it but, otherwise, it lists several factors that come into play as to Alexa rankings. https :// www . quora . com / Why - is - Alexa - rank - suddenly - dropping - in - the - past - few - days

A Quote from that article goes as follows: Quote - “EVERY DAY, ALEXA ESTIMATES THE AVERAGE DAILY VISITORS AND PAGEVIEWS TO EVERY SITE OVER THE PAST 3 MONTHS. THE SITE WITH THE HIGHEST COMBINATION OF VISITORS AND PAGEVIEWS OVER THE PAST 3 MONTHS IS RANKED .” - End Quote.

Last Edited: January 4, 2019, 10:18 AM

VinceSummers wrote on January 4, 2019, 12:50 PM

I tried to read the article, but as you suggest, the English is such that it is very hard to understand. Plus the jargon used in the article needed explanation -- terms, you know...

VinceSummers wrote on January 4, 2019, 12:51 PM

So they identify the types or articles, how? By tags? And how to they determine which health sites to keep? Like FDA, NIH, etc.? But specifically choosing the sites that remain by hand?

MegL wrote on January 4, 2019, 7:57 PM

I don't think sites need to be chosen "by hand". Keywords and algorithms should do most of it. I understand they are stopping indexing sites with unproven health claims and anti vaccination themes and similar, Also sites that claim to help you earn money instantly.

VinceSummers wrote on January 11, 2019, 7:35 AM

I agree in principle these are good things. But how can an algorithm determine a health claim is unproven? There's more to Google than meets t he eye (or ear).

MegL wrote on January 11, 2019, 7:48 AM

Apparently, some of the medical sites are worried about "quacks" and anti vaxxers but as you say, not all unproven health claims are spurious.

VinceSummers wrote on January 11, 2019, 8:39 AM

Well, what I'm really saying is an algorithm cannot evaluate quacks, etc., unless they hand pick them, surely? Suppose there was a site named BetterHealth. Would an algorithm say, "Ahah! A quack site." While of another site, say WebMD, "Ahah! A valid health site." How could the algorithm say that? See what I mean?

VinceSummers wrote on January 11, 2019, 9:08 AM

I generally avoid Quora and other such sites, unless I'm desperate. But when I'm desperate, I'll check under every rock! Hah.

MegL wrote on January 11, 2019, 9:53 AM

Apparently, the google algorithm assesses the articles, their titles, the content and the latent semantic indexing to assess what a site is about. Whether it can then say "quack", I do not know.

lookatdesktop wrote on January 13, 2019, 9:56 AM

I have seen bad grammar there. I think it is a good thing that Grammarly is available to people who like to blog, just so they don't make any critical spelling or grammatical mistakes.